Once again, the Indy fails to include information that would undercut their desired narrative about the UK debate over Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, mischaracterising sincere efforts to no-platform extremism as a cynical effort to stifle criticism of the Jewish state.
We emailed Financial Times editors, noting that the original headline of the article misled readers into believing that Dubai leads the Middle East in start-ups. Of course, Israel leads in this category. Editors agreed, and revised the headline.
We emailed Financial Times editors, noting that, five paragraphs down in the article, we’re told that Israel was not included in the report which ranked Dubai first in Mid-East start-ups. Of course, Israel leads the Mid-East in start-ups, and in fact has the 5th highest number of startup companies than any other country in the world. So, the headline’s claim that “Dubai leads the Middle East in start-ups” is simply not accurate.
Whilst we commend Indy editors for removing the article, the fact that one of their Middle East correspondents respects and was willing to amplify the views of such an anti-Zionist extremist serves as a troubling reminder of institutional anti-Israel bias which informs so much of their coverage of the region.
As we’ve noted in countless posts, Judaism’s holiest site is the Temple Mount, not the Western Wall. UK Media Watch previously prompted corrections on this same issue at The Independent, and Telegraph.
Here are recent corrections prompted by UKMW to articles at the Guardian, Daily Mail and Independent.
A tendentious and one-sided article published today at the Observer (sister site of the Guardian) doesn’t go as far as Sarsour, but does hyperbolically suggest the rights of women in Israel are being eroded to the point where democracy itself under threat.
A March 7th Channel 4 News video segment by international editor Lindsey Hilsum failed to challenge the narrative that Palestinians are being unjustly evicted from their homes in east Jerusalem. The segment […]
It’s quite telling that of all the political analysts the Indy journalist could have asked to comment, she chose a radical, anti-Zionist extremist who employs tropes about Zionism’s putative collusion with Nazism so vile they’d likely make Ken Livingstone blush.
“The BDS Movement Claimed Eight Victories in 2016. They Were All Actually Losses”.
It’s important to stress that Walker’s accusation that many Jews were chief financiers of the slave trade is not true according to an examination by historian Eli Farber, documented in his book ‘Jews, Slaves and the Slave Trade: setting the record straight’. Jews’ role in the slave trade was actually minimal, according to Farber’s research
Whilst nobody familiar with Banksy would be surprised by his use of imagery associated with classic antisemitism, it’s troubling that journalists who pride themselves on critically scrutinising every Israeli claim didn’t challenge the pro-Palestinian artist when he floated the risible claim that his latest project was benignly designed to promote dialogue.
The Guardian decision to publish Greenstein’s complimentary reference to Kaufman’s grotesque Nazi accusation may not itself be an act of antisemitism, but certainly represents another example of editorial decisions which have the effect of normalising such expressions of anti-Jewish racism.
We contacted Times of London editors regarding the quote, and they upheld our complaint about the fake use of the word “fake”.
For the third time in three weeks – and the fifth time since last June – we’ve prompted a correction at Times of London over this erroneous suggestion regarding the status of Tel Aviv. The latest example involves a March 1st article by Gregg Carlstrom titled “Netanyahu lambasted by report on Gaza war”.
No amount of sophistry or obfuscation can change the fact that the claim by the Guardian journalist was egregiously and substantively misleading to readers, and thus in violation of the accuracy clause of the Editors’ Code.
Guardian editors erased Dandan’s Israeli citizenship and US residency from the original Reuters report, misleading readers into believing that he (like the winner of the contest) is from the Palestinian territories.
The Guardian’s failure to convey to readers the antisemitic nature of the anti-Netanyahu placard in Sydney is not in itself antisemitic. However we do believe it’s indicative of their continuing obfuscation of endemic antisemitism within the pro-Palestinian movement and, more broadly, representative of how media outlets can normalise antisemitism without setting out to do so.
An op-ed in the Guardian by George Browning (the former Anglican Bishop of Canberra and the President of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network) concerning the Israeli prime minister’s visit to Australia is full of significant errors and distortions.
Remarkably, Guardian editors gave more space on their home page to the Azaria manslaughter verdict than to a report on 74 dead migrants washing up on shore in Libya this morning.